On 5/16/07, Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> wrote:
Satyam Sharma wrote:
>> > >semantics of it (read-only? read-write? write-only?
>
> Well, it _has_ to be write, don't really care if it's read-write or
> write-only. I would still prefer read-write, but we can go ahead with
> write-only too. It doesn't really matter, does it?
just to be devils advocate...
it should be a read that returns when done,
Heh, yeah. We just need to trigger that scsi_complete_async_scans()
after all ... might as well abuse all intuition on the user's behalf :-)
and that can be polled
Gaah! :-)
But seriously, though, this sysfs attribute can be implemented
_any which way_. Better for us if we do it the simplest way (and which
taxes the user's intuition the least). Just that Matthew asked so many
questions so I thought I might as well answer them :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
